1. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 1 of 6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
ROBERT A. BRAYSHAW, CASE NO. 4:12CV447-RH/CAS
Plaintiff,
v.
ANNETTE GARRETT,
Defendant.
___________________________________/
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, ROBERT BRAYSHAW, hereby sues Defendant, ANNETTE GARRETT,
and alleges:
JURISDICTION
1. This is an action involving the violation of Plaintiff’s federal civil rights. The
aggregate amount of damages claimed by Plaintiff against Defendant is in excess of Seventy
Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), the jurisdictional amount required for venue in this
Court.
2. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 in that this
is a civil action arising under the Constitution of the United States.
3. Jurisdiction of the Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1343(a)(3) in that
this action seeks to redress the deprivation, under color of state law, of rights secured to

2. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 2 of 6
Plaintiff by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States
of America.
4. Plaintiff’s claims for relief are predicated upon 42 U.S.C. §1983, which
authorizes actions to redress the deprivation, under color of state law, of rights, privileges,
and immunities secured to Plaintiff by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and
by 42 U.S.C. §1988 which authorizes the award of attorney’s fees and costs to prevailing
plaintiffs in actions brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983.
THE PARTIES
5. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff, ROBERT BRAYSHAW, has been a
resident of Leon County, Florida.
6. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant, ANNETTE GARRETT, was a
resident of Leon County, Florida and was a Police Officer for the Tallahassee Police
Department (“TPD”).
7. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned to represent his interests in this cause
and is obligated to pay her a fee for her services.
FACTS
8. Plaintiff promotes education and legal action, as well as research, publishing,
and advocacy in support of civil and constitutional liberties.
9. In order to provide information and political commentary, Plaintiff has
utilized popular websites such as Wikipedia.
2

3. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 3 of 6
10. Specifically, Plaintiff posted numerous entries discussing Defendant Garrett
on Wikipedia. In his posts, Plaintiff was critical of the TPD and Defendant Garrett. Plaintiff
expressed opinions that were favorable to neither TPD nor Garrett.
11. On or about March 4, 2011, Defendant Garrett deleted Plaintiff’s comments
and posts on Wikipedia discussing Defendant and the TPD.
12. In December 2011, after Plaintiff’s posts were deleted, Plaintiff obtained TPD
emails pursuant to a public records request. These emails revealed that Plaintiff’s posts were
removed by Defendant Garrett. Upon information and belief, Defendant Garrett used her
TPD computer to delete Plaintiff’s posts.
13. Throughout the end of 2010 and continuing into the beginning of 2011,
Plaintiff posted various documents critical of TPD and Defendant Garrett to various public
file sharing sites such as scribd.com, slideshare.com, and calameo.com. Upon information
and belief, Defendant Garrett requested that these sites delete Plaintiff’s shared files and
caused scribd.com and calameo.com to terminate Plaintiff’s account.
14. Plaintiff’s posts have never been obscene, sexually explicit, racially
derogatory, or defamatory. Neither has Plaintiff suggested and/or encouraged illegal
activities.
COUNT I
VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF’S
FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS
15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 above are hereby realleged and incorporated herein
by reference.
3

4. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 4 of 6
16. This is an action against Defendant for the violation of Plaintiff’s First
Amendment Rights. This claim is applicable to the Defendant under the Fourteenth
Amendment brought through 42 U.S.C. §1983.
17. Plaintiff has certain guaranteed rights to make statements that are of public
concern. The issues raised by the Plaintiff in his online comments and postings included
issues of public concern.
18. The actions described in part above were taken against Plaintiff in retaliation
for the exercise of his First Amendment rights which included reporting matters of public
concern via the internet.
19. The actions by Defendant were taken in violation of Plaintiff’s clearly
established right under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to be free from
retaliation motivated by the exercise of his First Amendment speech rights. The laws which
form the basis for this claim identified herein were clearly established at the time when the
aforementioned actions took place.
20. Defendant misused her power, possessed by virtue of state law and made
possible only because she was clothed with the authority of state law. The violation of
Plaintiff’s rights, as described above, occurred under color of state law and is actionable
under 42 U.S.C. §1983.
21. The foregoing actions of Defendant was willful, wanton and in reckless
disregard of Plaintiff’s rights, and were taken without any lawful justification.
4

5. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 5 of 6
22. As a direct and proximate result of the actions taken against Plaintiff by
Defendant described in part above, Plaintiff has been harmed and damaged. Plaintiff’s
damages include but may not be limited to emotional pain and suffering, loss of capacity for
the enjoyment of life, and other damages allowed by law including other tangible and
intangible damages. Plaintiff seeks equitable relief in the form of attorneys fees and costs,
as may be allowed by law. The injuries of which Plaintiff complains have occurred in the
past, are occurring at present and will continue in the future. Defendant is liable for these
harms.
23. Based on the willful and malicious conduct of Defendant, as is set out herein,
Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages.
24. Plaintiff has been forced to retain counsel to represent him to vindicate his
rights. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys
fees and costs.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:
(a) that process issue and this Court take jurisdiction over this case;
(b) that this Court grant equitable relief against Defendant, mandating
Defendant’s obedience to the laws enumerated herein;
(c) enter judgment against Defendant, and for Plaintiff awarding compensatory
and punitive damages to Plaintiff for Defendant’s violations of law
enumerated herein;
5

6. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 6 of 6
(d) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding Plaintiff
attorney's fees and costs; and
(e) grant such other further relief as being just and proper under the
circumstances.
DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues set forth herein which are so
triable.
DATED this 9th day of October, 2012.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Marie A. Mattox
Marie A. Mattox [FBN 0739685]
MARIE A. MATTOX, P. A.
310 East Bradford Road
Tallahassee, FL 32303
(850) 383-4800 (telephone)
(850) 383-4801 (facsimile)
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
6